Is Roblox the future of making games?

Not to bump this thread, but I do have a couple things I wanted to point out about roblox and how it's not entirely terrible (since most of this thread I think hits on the bad stuff and doesn't focus too much on the good stuff).

My Experience

I started playing roblox in about 2011. I was just a kid so I screwed around on some jeep obby game or whatever then forgot my password and eventually made a new account. I'm bigcrazycarboy on roblox, and judging by the name you can probably tell about how old I was when I made the account. I played almost every day, and since builder's club (a purchasable add-on to roblox for some added features) gives you free robux every day, I found myself spending money in games all the time. Something about roblox using non-official currency provokes kids to spend a little more than they would if they knew the conversion rate. R$25 here and R$25 (about 8.75 cents by the current exchange rate) there adds up over time. I think the lowest level of BC gets you a solid R$15 per day

Now as an experienced roblox developer, I've been making stuff in roblox for a couple years now, and I've got to say, there is some truth to things taking longer than they should. As with any game development platform, there is a lot of time investment that goes into making a game. I took about 3 years to thoroughly learn Roblox Studio and the Lua API that comes with it. I think I can say that when making quick multiplayer games, it would be an obvious choice due to the raw ease of use and the lack of networking knowledge you need to get something done, but when it comes to more intricate and complex games, roblox's tools do not even come close to that of Unity or any "real" game engine.

I'm currently working on a racing game, and the truth is I don't think I could have made a game with the quality of this in roblox from 2 years ago. The roblox team has really been eating their Wheaties, and it's clear they're reaching out to developers for honest feedback and trying to improve their engine. On multiple occasions I've personally been reached out to individually for input on potential new features or beta testing. Not to mention the developer community is very helpful and pretty friendly in general. Any time I need some help figuring out algorithms for scripts, script architecture, or optimization I can always just make a post on the developer forums and 2 or 3 devs that have already made something similar. Here's a link to my game if anyone would like to check it out:

https://www.roblox.com/games/2492693343/Midnight-Racing-Tokyo-DEMO

Now, based on the fact that there has been no advertising at all, we only started making this game in October, and I'm the only developer who knows how to code, I think it's pretty nice to be able to say that the other lead dev (the map artist) and I have each made about $400 in revenue so far. Some of that is being allocated to pay for advertising and stuff, but for the most part I don't think that's too bad. The problem comes when thousands of players start playing and I haven't gotten any anti-exploit system implemented yet. That brings me to the next topic:

Exploiting & Hackers

One problem that keeps recurring is exploiting. Since roblox uses the same client software for every game any developer publishes, exploiters are constantly working around the clock to crank out new ways to exploit it. These aren't just some lightweight money hack either, there are plenty of full - fledged code injectors (For example, Synapse) that actually inject Lua code into somebody's game. Filtering Enabled (write protection from the client on the server) helps with this a little bit, but if the hacker decompiles scripts replicated to the client, and invokes the server with the same arguments a legitimate script invokes the server with, then it's necessary for roblox devs to implement their own anti-exploit system. Unfortunately since it's security, you're on your own since no other developer is going to share their system with you. I'm not experienced enough with Unity to be able to compare or contrast the exploit vulnerability of the two engines, but I'd be inclined to believe that Unity is more liable than roblox considering Unity developers compile their own applications and they can't have a team of specialists changing memory pointers every week in the application, which roblox does have. This isn't to say roblox is super vulnerable - Cheat engine and easy stuff like that are not even relevant anymore. As for communities like V3rmillion though, there is still an element of exploiting going on, especially for non-Filtering Enabled games.

Future

As for the future of Roblox vs the future of Unity, well, the future of roblox is looking a lot like Unity right now to me. Like I said, I'm not terribly experienced in Unity, but I think Roblox is trying to make their "Places" similar to Unity "Scenes" based on the roadmap roblox has released. Not only that, but roblox is getting an entirely new lighting engine that looks quite realistic actually. These next couple years are going to be absolutely pivotal for roblox. Check out these screenshots with their new lighting engine (not yet fully implemented)

https://roblox.github.io/future-is-bright/results

Roblox is also planning to add PBR - Style Custom Materials, which to developers is absolutely insane. I've been asking for this on the developer forums and it looks like they have it scheduled for the 4th quarter of this year. Unfortunately, after asking a roblox employee, he said it would be likely that these materials wouldn't work with terrain immediately (though you can customize terrain diffuse colors applied to the materials.)

Terrain

Terrain is not the greatest in roblox. It's a pain in the ass to deal with and I hate it. Nonetheless, it's not impossible. Here's a trench scene I created a while ago:


It looks a lot better in the new lighting system, but I was too lazy to open up the beta version of roblox studio that supports it (sorry). I actually created this terrain using the current tools by dropping like 5000 bricks and just having them explode on the ground. It was treacherous. I then saved the terrain region and loaded it in outside of play mode, and removed my scripted exploding bricks. To dig out the trench sections and give the map some direction, I cut out sections of the terrain using a Part -> Terrain plugin and converting the Part to the "Air" material of terrain. Messy, I know, but it worked.

Luckily, Roblox has terrain on their roadmap for improvement. I spoke to a staff member and they said it what they had in mind was new modelling tools and heightmap / Colormap importers, which means any terrain creation can be done in GAEA or World machine and you won't even have to deal with roblox tools. Nice.


Another feature they're planning to add is something called StreamingEnabled. It's already been a thing in the past, but it sucked because there was no way to customize it and honestly it lacked features. Basically this helps with massive worlds, and makes up for a lack of an LOD system. Roblox can't have an LOD System because all the geometry is already made up of maximum simplified parts, but for meshes and Unions (pretty much boolean operators from Blender in roblox) there is already an LOD system. Actually, roblox plans to add an LOD system for Parts in the future - I have no idea how they'll go about that, but it'll be interesting to see what they come up with. I know it would help my game.

I could go on, but I think I'll just let you guys check the rest out for yourself. The bottom line is that roblox is really trying to up their game and see if they can get up to the level of other modern engines. I don't need to mention that Unity already has this, but one thing that Unity doesn't have is auto-generated LOD's but I guess Unreal makes up for that lmao.
https://devforum.roblox.com/t/whats-coming-in-2019-this-years-developer-roadmap/261224
https://developer.roblox.com/resources/Roblox-Platform-Roadmap



Conclusion
Basically to wrap this up, I wanted to point out that there are countless plugins on the roblox website that can do a lot of cool stuff. For instance,

https://www.roblox.com/library/716953901/Blender-rig-exporter-animation-importer
https://www.roblox.com/library/906681627/Quentys-Class-Converter-API-based
https://www.roblox.com/library/2268520847/Brushtool-2-1

Just to name a few. Another thing I see with roblox is just how dedicated they are to making sure that people's games don't become obsolete. They update stuff every once in a while, but for the most part developers don't need to pay attention to what's new in roblox updates because they are mostly additive updates rather than reconfiguring things like the API and whatever. I can still call functions and create instances that have been deprecated since 2010 if I want to, but I don't because there's really no reason to since all the new features overshadow it. I hope this is helpful and contributes to you guys deciding which engine you'll use. I simply don't know enough about Unity to be able to compare the two 1:1, but Roblox Studio is definitely a game engine, not a game.

Here are some cool games I'd like to share so you guys can see a closer representation to what the engine is capable of, rather than some crappy roleplay game lol.

Showcases
https://www.roblox.com/games/2995252561/DetaiIed-Subway-Station-ca-1983 - Made by my map designer & co dev of MRT.
https://www.roblox.com/games/268122365/Life-of-an-Otaku
https://www.roblox.com/games/41829220/Apartment-23-SHOWCASE
https://www.roblox.com/games/1179111853/Discontinued-Innocence
https://www.roblox.com/games/64861517/Neon-District-EPISODES-UPDATE

Gameplay
https://www.roblox.com/games/1111083356/Robot-64
https://www.roblox.com/games/1064846716/ROSES
https://www.roblox.com/games/2856821731/ALONE-Battle-Royale
https://www.roblox.com/games/332187077/Fireteam
https://www.roblox.com/games/2492693343/Midnight-Racing-Tokyo-DEMO - My game

Alright I hope you got something out of this. Keep in mind roblox uses a very different framework for creating games than most other engines - there are no "Components", only classes, Objects, and Properties. So be ready for that if you decide to take it up. Good luck!

 

I'm a small developer on Roblox and I've been developing games on Roblox for ~8 months now. One of the things about Roblox is that it's very easy to create a successful and profitable game. I'm only 13 years old and I've made ~$2K USD from Roblox mainly by doing commissions and selling assets. I recently sold one of my games that I made solo in about 3 months for $875USD. Although $875USD for a game that I made in 3 months may not seem like a lot, it's only my second game that I ever completed. There are also tons of other young developers on the platform who are very successful. I recently saw a 16 year old solo developer make ~$100KUSD+ from one game in ~1 year.

Although I don't have any experience with creating games outside of Roblox, I think Roblox will have a big part in the future of creating games as Roblox improves its engine and as developers create higher-quality games and set a higher standard for games on Roblox.

 

no way

 

Just keep in mind he's an outlier and that the majority don't make anywhere near that amount. As an example Engadget had an article where Roblox stated they were on track to pay out $30 million to Roblox creators. If you stopped reading there it would sound amazing.

Scroll down a few lines (and an image) and they give the rough estimate of 1.7 million for the number of people creating content on their platform. Averaged across all of them that would only be $17 for an entire year. Or to put it another way in order to make $100,000 you need to have approximately 5,900 creators that make no money at all.

At best it's just as much of a crapshoot as any other commercial platform, and at worst you would probably lose more money developing on it than you would developing on other platforms. That you're making more money selling assets to other developers than using them yourself is good evidence that it's no better than any other platform.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/07/22/roblox-30-million-pay-out-developers-2017-how/

 

Not to mention, that setting higher standards means more expensive (both time and money) development, harder development, higher entry point.

People usually don't recognize that having an engine which is capable of doing awesome things needs to have people who actually can use those tools properly in order to achieve success. And we can see it in Unity. Otherwise every asset flip would be at least awesome-looking game. But they aren't.

 

This really only holds true if only Roblox improves, but Unity's going to improve too. So will every other engine.

 

My six year old plays the S*** out of this game. Its the only game he plays except some coop in Lego star wars with his younger borther.

I dont understand it, the games look like utter garbage

edit: its really cool it creates young developers though. When I was a kid it was either assembler or the highway

 

I have a friend who in spare time makes £10k+ a year from roblox development. I have another friend who arguably makes better stuff, but makes close to nothing.

Its the same as any other platform, some make money and some dont. Like any platform, it mostly comes down to knowing target market and audience, and how you engage and acquire and retain that audience.

I personally would rather not develop in such a closed ecosystem but I am glad it exists for the people who do get a kick out of developing for it, either financially or in terms of "fun"

 

Same here. My 10 year olds almost exclusively play on Roblox. One of them pretty much only plays role playing games. They don't care about the graphics as long as it's fun and they can hang out with their friends.

What I like about it is that it gets them to try making worlds and learn a bit of scripting.

 

I forgot about Darth Vader Imortal, he loves the lightssabrer fights in that game

 

I am getting an error code 524 while starting the roblox. Does anyone know why this is happening?

 

This is not a roblox support forum, this forum is for unity. Please go to the roblox website and use their support.

 

ok thanks!

 

What if we are looking at things backwards...

Maybe Robolox is where game engines like Unity should be heading?

Imagine a Unity where you can build your own virtual worlds and share them, work on them together and have fun as well?

Could you imagine what a Unity game jam would be like with a themed virtual world where all the developers/creators can set up open shop projects zones or curtained/locked projects that are portals into the game they are creating.

Or just working on a Unity project where you share the world.

Could being in the world be more fun and productive than an IDE, or could it be really bad for horror/dark toned game worlds?

I wonder which game engine will solve the world portal problem first as this is key to enabling the Unity or <Insert Game Engine> Oasis.

And big corporations will be pushing to be the first Facebook, Amazon, Google, Steam, Unreal et al.

 

Why is there any shortage on playground-style game engines?

 

See your framing it as childish and immature, when most sandbox games with modding and editors are where a lot of creatives of all ages have the most fun with games they really enjoy, extending the life of the games well beyond the content of the creators.

Take the Halo games recently got re-mastered (no pun intended) with updates to a modern engine... How long before game franchises like Halo set up worlds where players can drop in and play any of the existing back catalogue as long as they have purchased the latest game or pay a subscription fee.

Lots of games have IDE editors that just need to be pulled into the game world for the full themed Virtual World sandbox effect.

What if by sharing the Unity game engine* every Unity game could let you transfer to any other Unity game?

* And a fast enough internet connection to stream content dynamically.

 

??? You're delusional.

My question is simple: is there a gap in the market in the playground-style game engines? You know, where you get a scenario and you can modify it for your heart's content as opposed as a generalist engine where you build up your own game however you like.
So what would be the rational behind throwing out Unity as we know it of the window and build a sad copy of Roblox or Core or whatever?

Addition: not to mention that Unity has several services in the making which allows similar ease of use. Visual Scripting comes to mind especially when they put out high-level building blocks. Also the Lego-microgame and various already existing and in-the-making open projects/starting packs. I don't see why would Unity should copy these engines in more depth.

 

Think of it like a platform war for the Oasis, once one game engine does it and becomes dominant the others will wither away.

Look at other tech giants that dominate their ecosystems and imagine a 3D virtual world wide cyberspace.

Mind you maybe we need a World Wide Web open style technology platform all game engine virtual 3D browsers can view.

It's comparable to the early days of the internet where different providers offered different online services and bulletin boards.

 

Arowx. You are correct. Unreal Engine has done this a bit where you can use Unreal Engine in VR to make VR games. But I don't expect Unity to go down this route. Probably some other engine/virtual environment will take over. I don't think Unity will evolve into the OASIS. Unity started off as a few libraries (PhysX) bundled together with a nice IDE and reflection using c# and Mono. Unfortunately because of this, it is playing catch up. But is it still useful. I am using it for a VR game.

 

Eh, I generally disagree. The more user friendly a game dev environment becomes, the more limited it becomes. That has always been the case. Today there are several easier game dev environments compared to Unity or Unreal, but they restrict creative control. AAA companies typically maintain their own engines for their big budget projects, partly because Unreal and Unity are themselves too restrictive.

You're never going to get a one size fits all development environment. With more hand holding you get faster development and it is more approachable for novices. With less hand holding you get slower development, have to do more work yourself, but you have more control over the end product.

Every project needs to pick their tools with that balance in mind. Most people here chose Unity because it strikes a good middle ground, doing a lot of work for you while leaving plenty of room to create anything you want. But for many people it is the wrong choice. Your entirely 3D networked dev environment will have the same exact issues. It will be just right for some, too restrictive for high end games, and doesn't automate enough for the simplest projects.

It is like trying to come up with a single car model which will dominate all car use cases, causing all other models to disappear. That will never happen. Everyone's needs and wants are different, so different cars will always exist. You can't occupy all 3 sides of the unattainable triangle.

 

Dreams exists, and from what I understand it's kind of a flop.

I think there's a worthwhile conversation to be had about the democratization of game dev and comparisons to other media types.

 

Dreams exists, project spark before that, roblox etc.... these things have always been around. Theres a reason they are not the "next big thing" and never have been. Theres a reason none of them have yielded decent games big enough to break out on their own. Theres a reason nobody is making these things except a select few who have become leaders in the market.

If this was really going to be a good suggestion, project spark would never have died the way it did.

Game dev is not meant to be a gamified experience. Same way that making a film or making music is not meant to be.

Sure, you can gamify it and it will be more enjoyable, but that in no way increases the quality of what you make - the very opposite, the restrictions will hold you back. Restrictive environments are restrictive environments, and a user friendly gamified game dev environment would be very restricted in what you could and cant do (see roblox again for examples of this).

 

One day we'll be able to program in VR without burning our faces off.
Whoever hasn't used VR can not disagree with this. Because VR is amazing and why would a programmer sit all day at a flat screen when they can program next to a lake on Mars for example.

 

because the lake on Mars doesnt make any improvement to the programming task?

because they dont want to spend 5 minutes readjusting straps and cables every time theyve gone for a coffee or a piss?

because they dont want the same area of their face to spend 12 hours a day sweaty and chafed until they start looking like Red Skull?

because reference books?

because physical devices? including target devices like arduinos, or phones. or wacom tablets and proper keyboards?

because Teams meetings?

because actual real-world conversations with colleagues?

because they like actual daylight, and being able to not look at a screen?

oh, and because my eyesight doesnt play well at 1" distances, and I dont need to make it considerably worse by them trying to focus on stuff my brain thinks is at longer distances?

preference : not wearing a VR headset all day just because fake scenery

 

My ADD kicks in when I have any distractions. I'd get way more done cast into some medieval dungeon than I ever would with scenic views.

 

You already can do that.

However, currently available software ROYALLY sucks for making customized environments to sit/work in.

Usually any program that allows you to see your desktop in VR desperately tries to lock you into some sort of account AND/OR does not offer a lot of environments to choose from, plus you can't really navigate those. If you have multiple screens, then you'll start hitting bandwidth problems.

So instead of glorious martian landscape you can float inside some void, or inside some nebula painted in distance, or you have a limited selection of environments, like "theater, another theater, theater in the woods, small theater, big theater, bedroom(also a theater)"

It seems that somebody should develop a "shard" software that would allow people to customize their VR environment and potentially host it for guests. Such software does not currently exist, although some attempts come close.

 

Augmented reality is likely to be more practical than virtual reality for a use case like this. With augmented reality you can have the best of both the real world and an artificial world. It's far less troublesome to deal with too when you have to get up from your workstation.

 

Agreed, why would I want a virtual monitor strapped to my face when I can just augment my existing physical setup, or even better, have a fake physical setup (a thing that is screen shaped but is just like made of wood or whatever) and then project a AR screen onto that

Having used the HoloLens 2 as a developer, I did try to use it for browsing documents or having extra "screens" around me while programming - it was always awful compared to just using my actual eyes and not having something on my head. VR is like all the bad from that and none of the good.

 

I don't know why you guys are discussing VR workflows when he Roblox Studio is neither that different nor that easier to use than your average engine editor, and definitely isn't "gamefied" like Dreams or Gamesparks. It's a boring Windows-ass software with tons of buttons, drop downs, tree views and whatnot. Coding is done by writing scripts, not some fancy visual lego-based thingamajig.

It's actually amazing that so many kids are creating stuff with it: we'll have a nice batch of game devs in the next few years.

I'd say there are things Roblox actually does better than Unity, like goddamn multiplayer. The collaborative editor is also quite good too. With better version control and auditing, this could be the future of game dev workflows.

 

Multiple threads got combined

 

Oh, hahahaha. Makes sense now!

 

For some reason I have a lot of doubts about that.

Main reason is the cost. Hololens is $3500. Quest 2 is $300. And everybody knows what happened to Google Glass.

Because you can do more with a completely virtual setup than you can with an augmented one?
With a VR helmet your entire office can look pretty much like this:

Spoiler

Well, you'll still need a PC and a keyboard and a small table for keyboard, but it is extremely compact.

Meanwhile, virtual space you operate can be vastly larger than physical one. You dive in, work, dive out.

Now, it is helpful to have pass-through mode to quickly check what the heck is going on around you, but I Think that beyond that AR has more limited applications compared to VR.

 

Just a button press on the Valve Index and you active the stereoscopic cameras on the front of headset.

 

And? Oculus has double tap passthrough mode that works the same way.

I just don't see AR as incredibly useful aside from industry applications.

Because in AR you're restricted by physical environment. In (seated) VR you're not.

 

So its not a problem in VR either I mean. You can even have passthough enabled at all times if so be it.

 

An easy to use gamedev system for all, based on simple blocks (lego-style) and landscape, plus node-based logic, should be do-able and if it paid creators fairly would be great. I thought that was Roblox's goal, at least visually, but sounds like they are still short!
Limitations are fine, as stop people trying to create anything they want and then giving up after seeing how much work is involved (maybe Dreams is there - not tried). This is why vast Minecraft creations are made because - blocks...

I suspect if Lego made a system (bit like Unity did with them) then it could be a big hit.

Is anyone else looking like a Roblox competitor in the simpler 3d-gamedev arena?

 

Minecraft maybe?
It's in a similar but lower poly area with it's sandbox approach as I think Roblox is a later game that followed Minecraft.

 

Epic just change the whole game mode selection area to emphasize creative map, and is possibly evolving fortnite towards a roblox model.

But on unity side you have VR chat...

 

I do not agree - you can technically do it very easily, its the companies M$ and Sony etc who generally do not like us playing together. Hell I had a game that connected VR players with PC and phone, tablet. Its not a technical limitation.

 

unfortunately finding good games on it is hard.
community sucks.
laziness is promoted heavily when making games.
roblox studio is a decent engine but if you want your game to get discovered you'll have to go through hell